Notice of Pre-AIA or AIA Status
The present application, filed on or after March 16, 2013, is being examined under the first inventor to file provisions of the AIA .
Response to Amendment
This Final Rejection is filed in response to Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an amendment filed 03/11/2026.
Claims 1 and 12 are amended.
Claims 1-2, 4-9, 12-13, 15-18, and 21-25 remain pending.
Response to Arguments
Argument 1, Applicant argues in Applicant Arguments/Remarks Made in an amendment filed 03/11/2026, on pg. 7-8 that prior art Sherril and Querales fail to teach the primary claim limitations, “a sensor characterizing a measured operating parameter of an asset and a property of the sensor comprising a linear range of the sensor over which a voltage output of the sensor is approximately liner with respect to the measured operating parameter” Response to Argument 1, Applicant’s arguments have been considered, however in light of the amendments a newly found combination of prior art (U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20190309614 “Benson”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20180095609 “Merg”, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20140039793 “Querales”) is applied to updated rejections.
However the examiner respectfully disagrees with applicant’s argument that the “target range” described in Benson is clearly not a “range of [a] sensor”. Applicant is correct in that Benson describes an embodiment where a sensor measures a delta between the flow of materials into the borehole and out of the borehole, but should also note that Benson specifically teaches rig sensors that have associated warning thresholds linked to the current measurement of the rig sensor. Thus the BRI for a range of a sensor encompasses the specified criteria range for operating with preferred criteria. The following paragraphs of Benson support this interpretation.
para. [0284], “This approach may provide a better comparison of the input volumes or flow rates and the corresponding output volumes or flow rates. In addition, the target range may be preset by an operator
para. [0328], Once steering control system 168 detects an unsuitable condition of drilling mud 153, an indication may be transmitted or displayed to the user. The indication may be a communication, such as a message, a short-message service (SMS) message, an email, an audible alert, a visual alert (e.g., a colored indicator that can be red, blinking, yellow, or green, according to specified criteria). The unsuitable condition may be a significant loss of drilling mud 153, that may be indicated when the loss exceeds a predetermined amount. For example the loss may be indicated when a drilling parameter associated with drilling mud 153 exceeds a predetermined range of values, or another alarm condition occurs.
Claim Rejections - 35 USC § 103
In the event the determination of the status of the application as subject to AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103 (or as subject to pre-AIA 35 U.S.C. 102 and 103) is incorrect, any correction of the statutory basis for the rejection will not be considered a new ground of rejection if the prior art relied upon, and the rationale supporting the rejection, would be the same under either status.
This application currently names joint inventors. In considering patentability of the claims the examiner presumes that the subject matter of the various claims was commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the claimed invention(s) absent any evidence to the contrary. Applicant is advised of the obligation under 37 CFR 1.56 to point out the inventor and effective filing dates of each claim that was not commonly owned as of the effective filing date of the later invention in order for the examiner to consider the applicability of 35 U.S.C. 102(b)(2)(C) for any potential 35 U.S.C. 102(a)(2) prior art against the later invention.
The following is a quotation of 35 U.S.C. 103 which forms the basis for all obviousness rejections set forth in this Office action:
A patent for a claimed invention may not be obtained, notwithstanding that the claimed invention is not identically disclosed as set forth in section 102, if the differences between the claimed invention and the prior art are such that the claimed invention as a whole would have been obvious before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to a person having ordinary skill in the art to which the claimed invention pertains. Patentability shall not be negated by the manner in which the invention was made.
Claim(s) 1-2, 12-13, 21, and 23 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20190309614 “Benson”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20180095609 “Merg”, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20140039793 “Querales”.
Claim 1:
Benson teaches a method, comprising:
receiving, by a configuration system including one or more processors, from an asset monitoring system, a configuration comprising a sensor measurement determined from a sensor characterizing a measured operating parameter of an asset (i.e. para. [0283], “the control system may be programmed to determine the volume (e.g., flow rate) of the fluids and solids introduced into the wellbore and the volume (e.g., flow rate) of the fluids and solids exiting the wellbore, then determine whether these two values are sufficiently close to be within the desired target range”, wherein the BRI for a measured operating parameter of an asset encompasses a flow rate for a sensor of a well) and a property of the sensor comprising a linear range of the sensor (i.e. para. [0284], “This approach may provide a better comparison of the input volumes or flow rates and the corresponding output volumes or flow rates. In addition, the target range may be preset by an operator”, wherein the BRI for a linear range encompasses a target range) ; and
generating, by the configuration system, a graphical user interface (GUI) including a first window containing a first identifier of the sensor measurement and a second identifier of the property of the sensor (i.e. para. [0068], The display 250 provides visual indicators … a differential pressure indicator 268, a standpipe pressure indicator 270, a flow rate indicator 272 );
providing, by the configuration system, the GUI to a display device for display of the GUI (i.e. para. [0067], Referring to FIG. 2B, one embodiment of a display 250 that may be provided by the on-site controller 144 is illustrated. The display 250 provides many different types of information in an easily accessible format. For example, the display 250 may be a viewing screen),
comparing, by the configuration system, the property of the sensor to a corresponding reference property of the sensor (i.e. para. [0357], “The system determines whether the data matches expected operational data, such as by comparing it to one or more preset thresholds or limits and determining whether the drilling rig operations are within acceptable limits”, wherein the current data is compared to an acceptable target range) stored within a data storage device operatively coupled to the configuration system (i.e. para. [0097], The drilling engineer 302 may also set drilling operation parameters in step 510 that are also stored in the database 128); and
determining based on the comparing at least one validation error for the sensor measurement when the property of the sensor does not match the corresponding reference property of the sensor (i.e. para. [0286], the control system is programmed to determine what happens when the comparison of the fluids and solids entering the well and the fluids and solids exiting the well is not within a desired target range. In step 2609, the control system may determine whether the difference between the solids and fluids exiting the borehole and those entering the borehole indicate that less solids and fluids are exiting than are entering. If this is the case, the control system may proceed to step 2611, at which the control system may be programmed to automatically generate an alert to an operator);
determining, automatically, by the configuration system, a correction comprising an updated property of the sensor for the operating parameter based on the selected validation error (i.e. para. [0357], If one or more drilling operations are not within acceptable levels or limits, the system may determine what, if any, corrective action is appropriate and may then automatically take such action, such as by sending an alert, sounding or providing an audio and/or visual alarm); and
providing (i.e. para. [0351], Based on the data received by the camera and the determination of one or more states… the computer system can be programmed to determine if one or more corrective actions should be taken and, if so, send one or more control signals to add more drilling mud, increase flow rate, decrease flow rate, add more or stop adding drilling mud additives, or take other corrective action).
While Benson teaches monitoring a sensor measurement and comparing the measurement to a property consisting of a linear range that is an acceptable limit for the sensor and subsequently issuing an updated corrective action based on the comparison, Benson may not explicitly teach
a property of the sensor comprising a linear range of the over which a voltage output of the sensor is approximately liner with respect to the measured operating parameter
receiving a selection of the sensor measurement within the first window of the GUI;
receiving a selection of a validation error from the at least one validation error within a second window of the GUI;
providing via a third window within the GUI.
However, Merg teaches
a configuration comprising a sensor measurement determined from a sensor (i.e. para. [0132], a PID for a vehicle component (e.g., sensor) with which the first circuit is associated (e.g., a PID for a MAP sensor if the first circuit is a circuit connected to the MAP sensor)”, wherein the BRI for a sensor encompasses a sensor associated with a particular vehicle component Parameter identifier (PID) value information) characterizing a measured operating parameter of an asset (i.e. para. [0168], “FIG. 9 shows the DUI 400 in an example scenario after the most-recent measured voltage 418 (depicted as 0.1 V at the illustrated point in time) is out of range (e.g., out of the 4.4-5.0 V baseline operating range), thus indicating a problem with the MAP sensor”, wherein the BRI for a measured operating parameter encompasses the current measured voltage of a sensor) and a property of the sensor comprising a linear range of the sensor over which a voltage output of the sensor is approximately liner with respect to the measured operating parameter (i.e. para. [0135], “baseline values can be stored with operating characteristics… baseline values can obtained when a vehicle is operating without fault… any baseline value can take the form of …a range of values (e.g., 4.5-4.8 V)”, wherein it is noted that a MAP sensor may have its measured operating parameter that is a current voltage compared to a linear range that is an operating voltage range for the MAP sensor. Wherein it is noted that a currently measured voltage for a sensor is approximately linear with respect to a baseline operating voltage range).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a property of the sensor comprising a linear range of the over which a voltage output of the sensor is approximately liner with respect to the measured operating parameter, to Benson’s sensor suite for monitoring out of range sensor measurement for control equipment and executing solutions for when measured values are compared to expected values, with how specifically a measured out of bounds value may be voltage and may be compared to a preferred voltage operating range for a specific sensor, as taught by Merg. One would have been motivated to combine Merg with Benson and would have had a reasonable expectation of success it may be desirable for the system to cause the user interface to display on the DUI a walkthrough/guide that would help a user to potentially diagnose the problem, and guiding the technician step-by-step to measure values of circuits that are associated with the problem circuit.
While Benson and Merg teaches monitoring a sensor configuration for voltage that monitors measurements and comparing the measurement to a property consisting of a linear range that is an acceptable limit for the sensor and subsequently issuing an updated corrective action based on the comparison, Benson may not explicitly teach
However, Querales teaches
receiving a selection of the sensor measurement within the first window of the GUI (i.e. para. [0024], “The corresponding values and settings 236 for the current operating point are shown below the graph. When the user selects a desired operating point, target values and control settings 238 (e.g., gas injection flow and choke setting) corresponding to the selected operating point are also displayed below the graph”, wherein the BRI for a selection of the sensor measurement encompasses selecting an operating point for a control sensor);
receiving a selection of a validation error from the at least one validation error within a second window of the GUI (i.e. para. [0021], When a user of the system is notified of an advisory (e.g., an alarm, issue or a performance improvement opportunity), the user can select the well identified by the advisory to display a summary 210 of the well's current status as shown in FIG. 2B);
providing via a third window within the GUI, the correction corresponding to the selected validation error (i.e. para. [0023, 0025], Both the most likely cause and the recommended actions to resolve the issue are generated by the expert system and presented at the bottom of the display as analysis system results 228 … Recommended action module 344 identifies and presents to the user a list of control values and/or other actions (e.g., a choke setting and a gas injection rate) calculated to produce a GL system performance consistent with a selected operating point)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add receiving a selection of the sensor measurement within the first window of the GUI; receiving a selection of a validation error from the at least one validation error within a second window of the GUI; providing via a third window within the GUI, to Benson-Merg’s GUI providing status information for control equipment and executing solutions for when measured values are compared to expected values, with an interface may have measured sensor data selected, wherein errors may be selected, and wherein solutions to said errors may be selected, as taught by Querales. One would have been motivated to combine Querales with Benson-Merg and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in order to aid a user in mentally tracking all the possible inputs and factor those inputs into a decision.
Claim 2:
Benson, Merg, and Querales teach the method of claim 1.
Benson teaches wherein the method further comprises, by the configuration system:
receiving, a selection of the correction (i.e. para. [0025], the user selects a setting/action that is accepted by recommended action module 344); updating the second identifier of the property of the sensor within the first window of the GUI to reflect the updated property of the sensor corresponding to the selected correction (i.e. para. [0023], The user can select one or more recommended actions to resolve the identified condition(s), causing the model to be updated to reflect both the condition(s) and the recommended action(s) selected);and transmitting the updated property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system (i.e. para. [0042], The recommended action module included on the storage medium can further accept a GL system operating point selection and initiate a change to one or more GL system settings in response to the selection).
Claim 12:
Claim 12 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 1, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 13:
Claim 13 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 2, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 21:
Benson, Merg, and Querales teach the method of claim 1.
Benson further teaches
wherein the property of the sensor comprises further comprises one or more set points for the operating parameter (i.e. para. [0284], “This approach may provide a better comparison of the input volumes or flow rates and the corresponding output volumes or flow rates. In addition, the target range may be preset by an operator”, wherein the BRI for one or more set points encompasses a target range).
Claim 23:
Claim 23 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 21, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim(s) 4 & 15 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20190309614 “Benson”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20180095609 “Merg”, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20140039793 “Querales”, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20150105878 “Jones”.
Claim 4:
Benson, Merg, and Querales teach the method of claim 1.
Querales teaches, further comprising:
receiving a selection of the correction (i.e. [0023], the user can select one or more recommended actions to resolve the identified condition(s), causing the model to be updated to reflect both the condition(s) and the recommended action(s) selected);
While Benson, Merg, and Querales teach at least one correction value that may be selected by a user and received by the system, Benson, Merg, and Querales teach may not explicitly teach,
updating the GUI to remove the selected at least one validation error from the second window; and transmitting information operative to disable the selected property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system.
However, Jones also teaches
receiving a selection of the correction (i.e. para. [0069], Fig. 3, “The tasks frame 306 includes a diagnostic tasks list 320 that contains a list of diagnostic tasks available for the user to access for the selected node ”, wherein a selected node selected from a first window hierarchy tree which displays a on second diagnostic parameter view, including an error status icon, that includes a third window task list from which a user may select a task of disabling the service).
Jones further teaches updating the GUI to remove the selected at least one validation error from the second window (i.e. para. [0075], “interfaces 510, 512, 514, 516 for each of the monitors 502, 504, 506, 508 update or refresh based on changes or selections to information displayed in a different role-based presentation interface”, wherein a user interface will be updated to reflect that a user has selected a disable service task for a node); and
transmitting information operative to disable the selected property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system (i.e. para. [0036], “the control devices may receive instructions from the controller 108 via inputs 114 to execute a specified command and cause a change to the process implemented and/or controlled by the field devices 112”, wherein the disable service task is implanted on the respective field device).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add updating the GUI to remove the selected at least one validation error from the second window; and transmitting information operative to disable the selected property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system, to Benson-Querales’ system management user interface, with wherein the at least one correction value disables the selected property of the sensor, and wherein the method further comprises, by the configuration system: receiving a selection of one of the at least one correction value within the third window; updating the GUI to remove the selected at least one validation error from the second window; and transmitting information operative to disable the selected property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system, as taught by Jones. One would have been motivated to combine Jones with Benson-Querales’ and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in order provide a more ways to quickly address a problem and take appropriate corrective actions.
Claim 15:
Claim 15 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 4, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim(s) 5-6 & 16 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20190309614 “Benson”, Mer, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20140039793 “Querales”, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20150105878 “Jones”, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20170177166 “Kockan”.
Claim 5:
Benson, Merg, and Querales teach the method of claim 1.
Benson, Merg, and Querales may not explicitly teach,
wherein the correction is associated with a configuration profile, the method further comprises, by the configuration system: receiving a selection of the configuration profile from a list of configuration profiles; automatically selecting the correction from the at least one correction value associated with the selected configuration profile;
updating the second identifier of the property of the sensor within the first window of the GUI to reflect the updated property of the sensor; and transmitting the updated property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system.
However, Jones teaches
wherein the correction is associated with a configuration profile (i.e. para. [0047], “the role-based processor 102 allows users to activate and deactivate a role-specific layer via a small set of commands”, wherein a correction may be an activation or deactivation action for a layer that is associated role, and wherein the corrective action updates the role-specific layer corresponding to a selected node from the role-based presentation interface), the method further comprises, by the configuration system: receiving a selection of the configuration profile from a list of configuration profiles (i.e. para. [0050], “ the role-processor 102 can provide role-dependent views to all personnel involved in configuring, operating, supervising… the role-based processor 102 may ask that an operator log in or otherwise identify his role”, wherein a user selects a role by logging in to a certain role); automatically selecting the correction associated with the selected configuration profile (i.e. para. [0042], “workstation 106 and/or other workstations with access to the process control system 104 may be configured to view, modify, and/or correct one or more processes within the process control system 104. The example workstation 106 enables a user to … view role-based process control system alarms, and/or change process control system settings (e.g., set points, operating states, clear alarms, silence alarms, etc.”, wherein after a user logs in and views their role based interface, they may select a role based alarm and take a corrective change process setting based on their selected role); updating the second identifier of the property of the sensor within the first window of the GUI to reflect the updated property of the sensor (i.e. para. [0063, 0071], “an example role is a control room operator. Responsibilities and/or tasks associated with such an operator may include … to identify potential process issues and taking corrective actions… red status indicator may indicate that the corresponding node has an issue, while a green status indicator may indicate that the corresponding node is functioning properly”, wherein a corrective action may include selecting a configuration task such as changing a value of a selected process control system in order to correct a status issue. Wherein the correction results in an updated identified for the property of the sensor representing a functional status in the GUI); and transmitting the updated property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system (i.e. para. [0043], “The example workstation 106 includes and/or implements the role-based processor 102 to monitor the process control routine and/or process control information transmitted by the controller 108”, wherein changes by a user in the role-based workstation are transmitted and implemented).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the correction is associated with a configuration profile, the method further comprises, by the configuration system: receiving a selection of the configuration profile from a list of configuration profiles; selecting the correction from the at least one correction value associated with the selected configuration profile; updating the second identifier of the property of the sensor within the first window of the GUI to reflect the updated property of the sensor; and transmitting the updated property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system, to Benson-Merg-Querales’ system management user interface, with wherein each of the at least one correction value is associated with a profile, and wherein the at least one correction value is an updated property of the sensor corresponding to the selected measurement, and wherein the method further comprises, by the configuration system: receiving a selection of a configuration profile from a list of configuration profiles; selecting a correction from the at least one correction value associated with the selected configuration profile; updating the configuration to replace the property of the sensor with the updated property of the sensor corresponding to the selected correction value; updating the GUI to include the updated property of the sensor within the first window and remove the selected validation error from the second window; and transmitting the updated property of the sensor to the asset monitoring system, as taught by Jones. One have been motivated to combine Jones with Benson-Merg-Querales and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in order to prevent a user in a role from being overloaded with less relevant information and save the user time in quickly carrying out specific actions.
While Benson, Merg, Querales, and Jones teach selecting a correction from the at least one correction value associated with the selected configuration profile; Benson, Querales, and Jones may not explicitly teach,
Automatically selecting the correction value associated with the selected configuration profile.
However, Kockan teaches
Automatically selecting the correction value associated with the selected configuration profile (i.e. para. [0045], “IHS 100 automatically adjusts the image characteristics based on the contents of a user's vision profile”, wherein the operating system automatically applies a vision correction based on the vision profile user has selected for log in).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add automatically selecting the correction value associated with the selected configuration profile, to Benson-Merg-Querales-Jones’ system management user interface with user profile associated corrections, with automatically selecting a correction from the at least one correction value associated with the selected configuration profile, as taught by Kockan. One would have been motivated to combine Kockan with Benson-Merg-Querales-Jones’ and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in order to save a user time by applying corrective changes that are most suitable to a user based on their selected profile.
Claim 6:
Benson, Merg, Querales, Jones, and Kockan teach the method of claim 5.
Jones further teaches
wherein each configuration profile is associated with a state of the asset and wherein the method further comprises (i.e. para. [0031], “ the software system of this disclosure also can facilitate information filtering by organizing functions and data from multiple sources into role-specific layers, such as the maintenance layer, the operator layer, the control system engineering layer”, wherein each role is associated with whether or not the state an assets is displayed to a specific role), by the configuration system: receiving a ruleset (i.e. para. [0047], The role-based processor 102 also can facilitate information filtering by organizing functions and data from one or more sources into role-specific layers, such as the maintenance layer, the operator layer); determining a state of the monitored asset based upon the ruleset (i.e. para. [0047], “The role-based processor 102 can display information for the maintenance layer when the user's organizational role is maintenance manager, for example, but not display the information for the maintenance layer when the role is control system engineer”, wherein the BRI for determining a state comprises determining a state of display for a user based upon the role of a user); and selecting the configuration profile that corresponds to the determined asset state (i.e. para. [0047], the role-based processor 102 can generate an instance of the maintenance layer that includes diagnostic parameters reported by field devices, maintenance history retrieved from a maintenance database).
Claim 16:
Claim 16 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 5, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim(s) 7-8 & 17-18 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20190309614 “Benson”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20180095609 “Merg”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20140039793 “Querales”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20150105878 “Jones”, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20170177166 “Kockan”, as applied to claim 5 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20200250561 “Restrepo Conde”.
Claim 7:
Benson, Merg, Querales, Jones, and Kockan teach the method of claim 5.
Benson, Merg, Querales, Jones, and Kockan may not explicitly teach
wherein the configuration system is configured to automatically select the correction associated with the selected configuration profile absent a user input.
However, Restrepo Conde teaches,
wherein the configuration system is configured to automatically select the correction associated with the selected configuration profile absent a user input (i.e. para. [0086], The various corrective actions may be user defined and/or automatically learned using one or more machine learning models, historical data, and/or user profiles”, wherein the model may automatically apply a learned real time corrective action associated with a user profile).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the configuration system is configured to automatically select the correction associated with the selected configuration profile absent a user input to Benson-Merg-Querales-Jones-Kockan’s system management user interface with user profile associated corrections, wherein the configuration system is configured to automatically select the correction associated with the selected configuration profile absent a user input, as taught by Restrepo Conde. One would have been motivated to combine Restrepo Conde with Benson-Merg-Querales-Jones-Kockan and would have had a reasonable expectation of success as the combination saves a user time as the system carries out a known correction associated with the user’s profile.
Claim 8:
Benson, Merg, Querales, Jones, Kockan, and Restrepo Conde teach the method of claim 7.
Querales further teaches
further comprising receiving user input confirming the displayed correction associated with the selected configuration profile prior to updating the configuration (i.e. para. [0023], “Both the most likely cause and the recommended actions to resolve the issue are generated by the expert system and presented at the bottom of the display as analysis system results 228. The user can select one or more recommended actions to resolve the identified condition(s)”, wherein the recommended fix may be displayed to be selected before updating the configuration).
Kockan further teaches a correction associated with the selected configuration profile (i.e. para. [0007], “a vision correction value associated with the first user is identified from the first vision profile and a first change in image characteristics to achieve the vision correction value on a graphical user interface (GUI) is calculated”, wherein a specific correction for displayed text of a hardware tablet is associated with user profile)
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add a correction associated with the selected configuration profile, to Benson-Merg-Querales-Jones-Kockan-Restrepo Conde’s system management user interface that asks for user confirmation of a displayed user correction that update the configuration of the hardware component, with user corrections that are associated with a selected configuration profile, as taught by Kockan. One would have been motivated to combine Kockan with Benson-Merg-Querales-Jones-Kockan-Restrepo Conde and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in order to reduce save a user time by providing user specific corrections that a user may quickly review and confirm.
Claim 17:
Claim 17 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 7, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim 18:
Claim 18 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 8, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim(s) 9 & 22 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20190309614 “Benson”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20180095609 “Merg”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20140039793 “Querales”, as applied to claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20210258660 “Stamatakis”.
Claim 9:
Benson, Merg, and Querales teach the method of claim 1.
Benson, Merg, and Querales may not explicitly teach
wherein the configuration further comprises a calculation to be performed on the sensor measurement to determine the operating parameter, wherein the calculation comprises a scale factor conversion.
However, Stamatakis teaches
wherein the configuration further comprises a calculation to be performed on the sensor measurement to determine the operating parameter, wherein the calculation comprises a scale factor conversion (i.e. para. [0064], “Sensor application 430 can submit configuration settings to sensor data control system 420 via web APIs… a second configuration setting can be stored that would be the basis for a conversion function for generation of a power measurement from a voltage measurement and current measurement taken by the sensors in sensor module unit… a third configuration setting can be stored that would be the basis for a conversion function to place the generated power measurement into the data format desired by sensor application 430”, wherein the BRI for a scale factor conversion encompasses the sensor metadata that is a sensor’s configuration settings detailing a conversion configuration further comprises a calculation to be performed on the sensor data scale the power measurement into a desired data format).
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add wherein the configuration further comprises a calculation to be performed on the sensor measurement to determine the operating parameter, wherein the calculation comprises a scale factor conversion, to Benson-Merg-Querales’ GUI providing status information for control equipment and presenting solutions for updating set points for measured equipment, with how a reference property of the sensor describing a known and working condition is stored in a device coupled to the system and compared to a measured property of the sensor that may be a measured point outside of a reference range of allowable values and, in the case where there is a mismatch detected resulting from the comparison, automatically offering corrections that entail new configuration properties in the form of adjusting measured values to an allowable tolerance range, as taught by Stamatakis. One would have been motivated to combine Stamatakis with Benson-Merg-Querales and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in order to facilitate fair comparison and ensure consistency across different datasets.
Claim 22:
Claim 22 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 9, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Claim(s) 24-25 is/are rejected under 35 U.S.C. 103 as being unpatentable over U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20190309614 “Benson”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20180095609 “Merg”, in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20140039793 “Querales”, as applied to Claim 1 above, and further in view of U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20150054736 “Brancato”.
Claim 24:
Benson, Merg, and Querales teach the method of claim 1.
Benson, Merg, and Querales may not explicitly teach
Wherein the property of the sensor further comprises a frequency response of the sensor.
However, Brancato teaches
Wherein the property of the sensor further comprises a frequency response of the sensor (i.e. para. [0033], “the user selects an established biometric input range from the set of previously established biometric input ranges (see FIG. 4) from data store 480 utilizing user interface 520. For example, the user might select a heart rate monitor device and the "normal" range”, wherein the BRI for a frequency response encompasses how one of the biometric monitor sensors may be a input devices can includes devices such as a heart rate monitor, a blood pressure monitor, a muscle tension monitor, a perspiration monitor, a brain wave monitor, all of which may give frequency responses) .
It would have been obvious to a person of ordinary skill in the art before the effective filing date of the claimed invention to add Wherein the property of the sensor further comprises a frequency response of the sensor, to Benson-Merg-Querales’ GUI providing status information for control equipment and presenting solutions for updating set points for measured equipment, with wherein the property of the sensor further comprises a frequency response of the sensor, as taught by Brancato. One would have been motivated to combine different types of sensors of Brancato with the data monitoring and solutions of Benson-Merg-Querales and would have had a reasonable expectation of success in order to assist the user in making decisions or analyzing the user's current situation.
Claim 25:
Claim 22 is the system claim reciting similar limitations to claim 9, and is rejected for similar reasons.
Conclusion
The prior art made of record and not relied upon is considered pertinent to applicant's disclosure.
U.S. Patent Application Publication NO. 20200045519 “Raleigh”, teaches in para. [0466], upon detection of one or more service verification errors, such as the various service verification errors discussed above, the device is directed to a quarantine network status in which the device can, for example, only access network control plane functions,
Applicant's amendment necessitated the new ground(s) of rejection presented in this Office action. Accordingly, THIS ACTION IS MADE FINAL. See MPEP § 706.07(a). Applicant is reminded of the extension of time policy as set forth in 37 CFR 1.136(a).
A shortened statutory period for reply to this final action is set to expire THREE MONTHS from the mailing date of this action. In the event a first reply is filed within TWO MONTHS of the mailing date of this final action and the advisory action is not mailed until after the end of the THREE-MONTH shortened statutory period, then the shortened statutory period will expire on the date the advisory action is mailed, and any nonprovisional extension fee (37 CFR 1.17(a)) pursuant to 37 CFR 1.136(a) will be calculated from the mailing date of the advisory action. In no event, however, will the statutory period for reply expire later than SIX MONTHS from the mailing date of this final action.
Any inquiry concerning this communication or earlier communications from the examiner should be directed to DAVID H TAN whose telephone number is (571)272-7433. The examiner can normally be reached M-F 7:30-4:30.
Examiner interviews are available via telephone, in-person, and video conferencing using a USPTO supplied web-based collaboration tool. To schedule an interview, applicant is encouraged to use the USPTO Automated Interview Request (AIR) at http://www.uspto.gov/interviewpractice.
If attempts to reach the examiner by telephone are unsuccessful, the examiner’s supervisor, Cesar Paula can be reached at (571) 272-4128. The fax phone number for the organization where this application or proceeding is assigned is 571-273-8300.
Information regarding the status of published or unpublished applications may be obtained from Patent Center. Unpublished application information in Patent Center is available to registered users. To file and manage patent submissions in Patent Center, visit: https://patentcenter.uspto.gov. Visit https://www.uspto.gov/patents/apply/patent-center for more information about Patent Center and https://www.uspto.gov/patents/docx for information about filing in DOCX format. For additional questions, contact the Electronic Business Center (EBC) at 866-217-9197 (toll-free). If you would like assistance from a USPTO Customer Service Representative, call 800-786-9199 (IN USA OR CANADA) or 571-272-1000.
/D.T./ Examiner, Art Unit 2145
/CESAR B PAULA/ Supervisory Patent Examiner, Art Unit 2145
Prosecution Insights